CLEVELAND, Ohio -- Former Mayor Michael R. White once likened the Cleveland schools to Vietnam -- a place where well-meaning people wade in to help, only to end up mired in a nightmare for years.

He dived in anyway.

Nearly 13 years ago, White and the Ohio legislature took the leap. The Cleveland schools went from being run by an elected school board -- like every other district in the state -- to being under mayoral control.

This year, the Cleveland schools graduated the first students whohad attended the district since kindergarten entirely under the direction of a mayor, whether that be White, Jane Campbell or current Mayor Frank Jackson.

Did those students receive a better education because of the shift to mayoral control? That depends on whom you ask and what measurements you consider. Because so many external factors have changed over more than a decade, there's no clear-cut victory to be declared. But there are signs of progress.

George Voinovich, the former Cleveland mayor who was governor when he signed the bill putting White in charge, said he believes the district has improved, mostly by removing politicking, grandstanding and patronage from the school board.

"I really believe that we're much farther ahead with the system that we have than with an elected school board," said Voinovich, now retired after 12 years as a U.S. senator.

Others involved at the time hold similar views: The elected board, they say, was so dysfunctional that a drastic change was needed. When the state legislature voted to make the switch in 1997, the Cleveland schools were in fiscal emergency and under control of both the state superintendent and the federal courts.

"We probably couldn't have gotten much worse," said the Rev. James Lumsden, a former school board member who pushed for the change. "If there was even a modest shift, it was a quantum leap."

Today, the district is under local control and its budget is balanced -- albeit through closing schools, laying off staff and receiving heavy subsidies from the state.

Tangibleevidencethat the district has improved academically ishard to come by, although some measures certainlysuggest students are performing better.

For instance, before mayoral control, the district's graduation rate hovered around 40 percent or lower. Though methods of calculating the rate have changed, it climbed steadily to almost 62 percent for the 2006-07 school year before losing ground. After two years of languishing in the mid-50s, the district reports its 2009-10 graduation rate, the most recent available, shot up to almost 63 percent.

On the surface, statetest results from 1998-99 to 2010-11 show significant improvement in the percentage of students considered "proficient" in most areas of study. For example, only 19.5 percent of sixth-graders in 1998-99 tested as proficient in reading, compared with nearly 64 percent last year. Math, social studies and science proficiency rates more than doubled over the same period.

But Ohio Department of Education officials notethattest formats, scoring methods and the system by which students are evaluated and ranked have all changed, making comparisons invalid.

Regardless of the methods, the Cleveland schools still rank near the bottom. Though the district moved up a rating level to "continuous improvement" last year, it fell back to "academic watch" on 2010-11 state report cards that will be released this week.

And larger changes outside the district, like the collapse of the housing market and national recession, have changed both the size and makeup of the school system.

The district that White took over in the 1998-99 school year had an estimated 77,000 students. Today, it has about 42,500.

Much of that was from the city's population falling by more than 80,000 between 2000 and 2010 -- a drop of 17 percent. Charter schools, an afterthought in 1998-99, also became major players, siphoning off students from the district.

In addition, the city has become poorer. In 1999, the U.S. Census Bureau estimated Cleveland's poverty rate at 26 percent. In 2009, the most recent estimate available, the poverty rate had climbed to 35 percent.

For children under 18, the poverty rate rose from 38 percent to 51 percent over the same period.

James Penning, the interim superintendent at the time White took over, said he still watches the district and sees improvements, though those can often be fleeting and beyond the control of district leadership.

"I think there's been some progress made in some areas," said Penning, now a state auditor. "But some of the issues that plague every urban district in the country still play out in Cleveland. The higher the concentration of poverty in the district, the lower the outcomes will be."

Cuyahoga County Councilman Dale Miller voted against mayoral takeover when he was a state representative, worrying about the loss of voter control of the district. Today, he's not sure what effect the change had, noting that the larger forces of population change have pulled away much of the district's core.

"The overall effect has been not a lot," he said. "My guess is that if we had continued under the elected school board, our situation would not be significantly different from where we are today."

Former mayors White and Campbell did not return phone calls seeking comment for this story. Other major figures involved in the original debate have retired or moved on to jobs in other cities.

But those who remain in the area or stillwatch the district from a distance are virtually unanimous in recognizing one change in the district: Stability.

The federal court's desegregation and busing orders in 1977 and 1978 are generally considered to have accelerated white flight from the city and a decline in student population. The rulings, coupled with the departure of longtime Superintendent Paul Briggs in 1978, marked the start of a 20-year revolving door of school chiefs.

In the 20 years between Briggs' departure and White taking control and hiring Barbara Byrd-Bennett in 1998, the district had 12 superintendents, including interims. Between 1990 and 1998, six people held the position.

The court orders also marked a period in which the federal courts took increasing control of the district before handing oversight of it to the state superintendent in 1995, after ClevelandSuperintendent Sammie Campbell Parrish and some of her top staff left.

The history of mayoral control in Cleveland

1977: U.S. District Court finds that Cleveland schools discriminate by segregating students by race. A year later, the court issues orders and takes increasing control of the district.

February 1995: Superintendent Sammie Campbell Parrish resigns to take another job after three years with the district.

March 1995: Federal court Judge Robert Krupansky hands control of Cleveland schools to the state superintendent, citing internal dissension, lack of leadership and fiscal irresponsibility.

November 1995: A coalition of churches and community activists calling itself Westside-Eastside Congregations Acting Now (WE-CAN) asks then-Mayor Michael White to take over the schools.

September 1996: Legislation is proposed in Columbus to give the mayor control of the system.

October 1996: State Auditor Jim Petro declares the Cleveland schools, already under state control, to be in fiscal emergency.

November 1996: Voters pass a 13.5-mill school levy.

July 1997: State legislature votes to give White control of the district. Gov. George Voinovich, a former Cleveland mayor, signs the bill a month later.

March 1998: Federal Judge George White dismisses challenges by the NAACP and two unions to the takeover, releases the district from court control from the segregation case.

September 1998: White takes control of the district, names a nine-member school board.

November 2002: In a vote required by the legislation allowing mayoral control of the district, more than 70 percent of Cleveland voters agree to keep the mayor in charge. The Cleveland Teachers Union and Cleveland branch of the NAACP, who had both opposed the change, shift their position and support it.

June 2011: The kindergartners of 1998 graduate from high school, the first Cleveland students to spend their entire school careers in the district under mayoral control.

-- Patrick O'Donnell

Judge Robert Krupansky cited internal dissension, massive debt and an inability to manage the district in issuing the order.

Observers describe the district and its elected school board at the time as chaotic.

"The district was performing so horribly for both black and white kids," said Lumsden, a school board member for two terms under White. "It seemed as if, when I became involved, that the board itself was unable to govern. It was more wrapped up in patronage and cronyism than helping children."

Lumsden, who joined the board as part of a White-backed slate, said board members often resorted to race-baiting and pushing class conflict to gain attention and advance politically.

Penning, who actually served as interim superintendent twice, called the board of that time "a very political animal."

"The focus of their energy wasn't always on academic outcomes for kids," Penning said. "We were saddled with a huge debt. We were one of the first districts to be put into fiscal emergency. We had a dysfunctional board that wanted to inject political issues into each decision."

Chris Carmody, an aide for White from 1990 to 1995, said the mayor was frustrated that polarizing and unqualified candidates could win school board seats. Because the races were citywide for at-large seats, and often attracted many candidates, modest vote totals could win, he said.

White, he said, had hoped to change the system by creating something like council wards so that only a few candidates would face each other in each areaand would need broader support thereto win. White also named and supported slates of candidates to gain influence.

Voinovich, as governor and a former Cleveland mayor, said he talked with White about the frustrations of running a city without the ability to improve the schools. He said White joked in one of those conversations that the district would become Voinovich's Vietnam when the state took the district over in 1995.

"I was frustrated as mayor because I didn't have control of the school system and I had to put up with the shenanigans of the school board," Voinovich said. "I told Mike, 'You're going to have to really get involved. We'll help you get the job done.' "

Soon a group of ministers that included Lumsden, who had left the school board, was pushing for control of the district to be given to the mayor, instead of staying with the elected board. A groundswell also slowly grew among state legislators, who proposed measures to put White in charge.

"We were all grasping at straws," Lumsden recalled.

Former State Rep. Mike Wise, a Mayfield Republican who pushed one of those measures, said the goal of the change for "the worst district in the state, by far" was modest -- to put the schools back under local control, instead of under the state or the courts. He wanted to end the district taking on debt and he wanted to see better facilities for students, bothof which have happened.

"It wasn't meant to be the final solution," Wise said. "It was meant to be a step in the right direction."

Two steps not directly related to mayoral control also aided the district over the period. Voters in 1996 approved a large school tax increase -- the last operating tax the district has passed -- that helped stabilize the budget. And in 1997, as the legislature approved mayoral control but before it took effect, the district used some of that money to start all-day kindergarten -- a program many experts say is key in any district to increasing student achievement.

Those who see improvement credit White with selecting Barbara Byrd-Bennett as the first chief executive officer under the change. Byrd-Bennett remained with the district for seven years, ending the revolving door of superintendents, and is credited with boosting state test scores and posting a dramatic increase in the district's graduation rate, though part of that came from better bookkeeping.

Former Cleveland Teachers Union President Richard DeColibus said White and Byrd-Bennett changed his mind about mayoral control. Originally, he and the union sharply opposed the shift after a bitter 1996 contract negotiation that DeColibus says White ran from behind the scenes. The CTU sued to block and overturn the shift.

DeColibus said that mayoral control would work only if White picked a strong leader as CEO, then backed away and let him or her run the district. DeColibus had expected neither to happen, but both did.

"White left her alone and helped her when he could," DeColibus said. CTU and Byrd-Bennett developed a good relationship and won his support, he said.

Byrd-Bennett left in 2005 amid complaints about her pay, which approached $300,000 a year, and the failure of two bids for new school taxes. She recently worked for the Detroit school district, but she could not be reached for comment.

Under mayoral control,Jackson appoints members of the nine-person school board and is actively involved in monitoring the district, fighting politically for it and helping choose leadership. Every week, he meets with Board President Denise Link, new CEO Eric Gordon and his education aide, Monyka Price.

Jackson was part of the interviews of finalists for the CEO position in May and interviewed Gordon before he was selected. He also was responsible for bringing in former National City Bank Chairman Peter Raskind as the temporary CEO this spring.

Gordon said Jackson is a "stabilizing influence" and source of advice and perspective.

"Mayor Jackson has provided good counsel but is not trying to be the superintendent," Gordon said. "He has the city to run. He wants to be well-informed. He wants to understand things, but I have to make the administrative decisions."

Jackson said the time he spends on schools varies, depending on what issues come up. He said handling the schools does not detract from him running the city.

"It would if I was micromanaging," the mayor said. "But I don't do that."

Jackson joined the voices praising the change to mayoral control for reducing the political motivations of the board, providing more stability and allowing board members and the CEO to focus more on educational results.

"It's really a necessity," he said, though he conceded that the stability alone "is not sufficient to gain the success that we need."

ButWhalen said she would rather have voters pick the school board again.

"That way, if we don't like what's going on, we can vote them out," Whalen said. "At this point, we have nothing to say."

Donna Brown, a citizen activist who regularly attends school board meetings, said she has ongoing concerns about large class sizes, not enough computers and students not being able to take textbooks home.

"We, the citizens, don't have any rights," said Brown. "Once you take power from the people, you can't help the people."

And she dismissed claims that an appointed school board is less political than an elected one.

"Now the politics is in the back room," Brown said.

Penning, the former interim superintendent,thinks having an appointed school board and strong direction from the mayor made it possible to have Raskind as the interim CEO this year and for Raskind to make difficult decisions about closing schools and laying off employees to balance the budget. Penningdoubts that an elected board would have gone that route.

"Their re-election depends on the popularity of the decisions that get made," he said. "You can't benefit from popular decisions when you hire a CEO that makes unpopular decisions."

Follow Us

cleveland.com is powered by Plain Dealer Publishing Co. and Northeast Ohio Media Group. All rights reserved (About Us).The material on this site may not be reproduced, distributed, transmitted, cached or otherwise used, except with the prior written permission of Northeast Ohio Media Group LLC.